A bitter media war is raging in San Diego’s gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community. The battle pits San Diego Gay and Lesbian News, an online operation that is less than a year old, against Gay and Lesbian Times, an online and print publication that is a graybeard of 22 years.

On May 11, San Diego News Network (SDNN), a general-readership online publication, and its media partner Gay and Lesbian News published a scathing hit piece on Michael Portantino, publisher of Gay and Lesbian Times. On May 19, SDNN published a second article that contained detailed financial information purportedly from the bank account of Portantino’s company, the parent of Gay and Lesbian Times.

Two prominent San Diego politicians are involved. The publisher of Gay and Lesbian News, Johnathan Hale, is the boyfriend of Councilmember Carl DeMaio, a self-professed gay. District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, who is also gay, has put investigators on the tail of Portantino, allegedly to check if the publication is inflating its circulation figures.

Portantino’s company, in turn, on Monday filed suit in Superior Court against one of his former financial employees, Tim Marzullo, for breach of confidentiality agreement. The suit charges that Marzullo publicly released private and confidential financial, tax, and bank information that he got from the Gay and Lesbian Times. As a result, “Agents of the San Diego County district attorney’s office appeared unannounced at the homes of employees of the Gay and Lesbian Times and questioned those employees about the private information publicly released by defendant Marzullo,” according to the suit. The suit says that others participated in Marzullo’s alleged scheme.

The story is full of ironies. The reporters who put together the SDNN attacks showed the purported bank figures to a local accountant, who declared that Portantino’s company was in “severe financial turmoil.” But before the month was out, SDNN had sent emails to its freelancers, who provide the bulk of its original copy, saying, “We are suspending all agreements and stipends with our free lance contributors and writers” in a mere three days. Later, chief executive Neil Senturia said SDNN was seeing if it could survive financially with “a smaller team.” So much for the Times's “financial turmoil.”

In its second attack on May 19, SDNN said that “a California Bank & Trust business account statement [for the parent of the Times] shows a negative ending balance of $16,060.33 on Feb. 26, 2010.” The bank account had a negative balance for 34 of 38 days in January and February, claimed the story. Then it talked about wire transfers to the mother of Portantino, whom he has supported for 25 years, and mortgage and utility payments from the bank account.

Asked if the bank would have given out such information to a publication, California Bank & Trust spokesperson Tiffany Massey says, “Absolutely not. We’re aware of that situation. We have no idea how that person got that.”

There is a rumor that the News and SDNN reporters got the bank account information from district attorney investigators. But district attorney spokesman Paul Levikow says that the agency’s investigators would never have given out such figures to reporters. And a prominent San Diego bank attorney says such information cannot be subpoenaed unless there is ongoing litigation, and Levikow won’t even confirm that there is an investigation because no complaint has been filed. Clearly, the purported bank account information did not come from either the bank or government investigators.

The May 11 piece gave purported facts about how many Times papers were being printed. “The first rendition on the SDNN website implied that Advanced Web Offset [the Times’s printer] gave the information,” says Dan Armstrong, general manager of the Vista printing company. “Four or five hours later they amended it.” (The rumor is that Advanced had its lawyer call SDNN and demand the change; Armstrong, laughing, won’t confirm that.) “Everything between Advanced Web and its customers is confidential.”

And that raises a serious question: how could Dumanis send her investigators out to see if the Times is bloating circulation numbers when she should also be asking how the News and SDNN got the private financial and printing-invoice information that was published? And she could look into one other matter: the News reprinted the first SDNN hit piece. But it did not reprint the second piece that contained the figures from the bank account.

In the early 2000s, several papers, particularly the Chicago Sun-Times, Dallas Morning News, and Tribune Company’s Long Island Newsday and companion Spanish-language publication Hoy, admitted that they had pumped up circulation numbers. In the last-named case, there were criminal charges and admissions of guilt. So there are legal precedents for pursuing a criminal case for circulation inflation.

But there are also precedents for criminal cases against reporters who illegally get private information. One of the best-known was an incident in Cincinnati in the late 1990s. The Cincinnati Enquirer published an 18-page exposé of locally based Chiquita Brands, charging the controversial company with misdeeds in Colombia, Honduras, Guatemala, and Ecuador, among many other things. But the primary reporter, Michael Gallagher, illegally dialed into Chiquita’s voice-mail systems and listened to conversations among company officials. Result: the paper’s owner, Gannett, retracted the article and paid more than $10 million to Chiquita. Gallagher was fired and pleaded guilty to two felony counts.

Dumanis already has a reputation for only pursuing possible wrongdoers who do not belong to the establishment — particularly those who do not donate to her campaigns. The Times is liberal and Democratic. It has criticized her and DeMaio, and particularly Proposition D, the strong-mayor initiative so passionately backed by DeMaio before its passage last week. (Hale’s newspaper carried ads in favor of Prop. D, as well as backing it editorially.)

Several former employees of the Times, including Marzullo, contributed to the slashing attack on Portantino. Joseph Peña, a former editor of the Times, was listed as a contributor to both stories. He would not comment to me. Marzullo, a former accounting assistant and office manager of the Times, says, “My comment is that I am cooperating with authorities.” Hale, publisher of the News, worked for Portantino in marketing. “I am not at liberty to comment. It is the D.A.’s investigation,” says Hale. DeMaio made an innocuous comment on the record, then called back and wanted to withdraw the comment. Portantino won’t comment.

I have been trying for some time to contact Senturia and his wife, Barbara Bry, the associate publisher of SDNN. Lo and behold, one time I reached Senturia. He said hello. I said, “Is this Neil Senturia?” His curious reply: “It depends on who is calling.” I gave my name, and he terminated the conversation.

More from SDReader

More from the web

Comments

a2zresource June 16, 2010 @ 1:19 p.m.

"District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis... has put investigators on the tail of Portantino.... Dumanis already has a reputation for only pursuing possible wrongdoers who do not belong to the establishment — particularly those who do not donate to her campaigns."

The number of questionable issues involving large reliable campaign donors in this hamlet that never evolved into formal DA investigations may be legion. It is a wonderful thing to have a local prosecutor's discretion on whether to file charges or not.

For disclosure: I have already been involved as a crime victim in a matter resulting in a federal criminal conviction of a local public utility that will remain nameless, where the same matter was not pursued by the DA's office but did result in a civil action by County Counsel. The defendant's campaign contributions were not at issue during the federal criminal trial testimony.

0

Don Bauder June 16, 2010 @ 2:08 p.m.

Response to post #1: Just think: San Diego had an excellent, fair DA in Ed Miller. Those days are long gone. Best, Don Bauder

0

Ponzi June 16, 2010 @ 8:32 p.m.

I wish we could run some of these carpetbaggers out of San Diego and back to the East Coast they crawled out of.

0

David Dodd June 16, 2010 @ 8:41 p.m.

Wow. Brings a whole new meaning to coming out of the closet.

0

David Dodd June 16, 2010 @ 8:44 p.m.

And, for what it's worth, I think that Gay and Lesbian Times is an excellent publication. Not choosing sides, but I have enjoyed many articles from G & L T over the years.

0

Don Bauder June 16, 2010 @ 8:50 p.m.

Response to post #3: The East Coast and Midwest don't have a monopoly on corruption, as you know. But I agree: some tar and feathers would help things in San Diego. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 16, 2010 @ 8:53 p.m.

Response to post #4: I don't think this conflagration will end soon. There is real hostility on both sides. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 16, 2010 @ 9:06 p.m.

Response to post #5: I had not read either publication until I started doing research for this column. I do think the Times has the most to offer, but I didn't read enough to judge either one. I've done investigative financial journalism for more than 45 years. I would never have printed the details from a private bank account unless they were from a criminal or civil lawsuit, or some official document, and thus protected. How would one know they were legitimate? SDNN and GLN will have to answer to that, I think. Did they check a lawyer? If so, did the lawyer ask them where the purported information came from? Did the DA promise them protection if they printed the details? If so, did the DA have the authority to do that? There are many questions here. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 June 16, 2010 @ 9:37 p.m.

Just think: San Diego had an excellent, fair DA in Ed Miller.

We usually agree-but not on Miller.

Dale Akiki was a witch hunt, and will forever be linked to Edwin Miller as DA.

It was a disgrace. Miller was responsible for launching that witch hunt. Miller and and the prosecuting attorney Mary Avery should have had their law licenses revoked over that case.

At the very LEAST, those two should have had to personally PAY the $6 million liability that case cost the county.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 16, 2010 @ 9:52 p.m.

I worked with Michael Portantino for a very short period in the early 90’s when I was in commercial real estate. He was very honest and totally above board for the short time I dealt with him.

Michael Portantino made the right move by suing his former employee, and he should not stop there-but go after everyone who was using that confidential information. The DA investigators have no qualified immunity under these circumstances. Even Dumbass wouldn't have immunity in the investigative stage, if she is involved.

It is a clear invasion of privacy- and not only that it could lead to huge liability judgments against anyone who published, or otherwise disseminated that confidential information.

You simply cannot allow low life losers like that to do such disruptive things to not only your livelihood, but your life with impunity.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 16, 2010 @ 9:56 p.m.

Did the DA promise them protection if they printed the details? If so, did the DA have the authority to do that?

The DA has no legal authority to offer protection. The DA would be in just as much hot water (if not MORE) as the one actually publishing the info......and even if the info IS true they are still liable for invasion of privacy and possibly intentional interferance with economic expectancy.

0

Burwell June 16, 2010 @ 10:46 p.m.

The DA would be in just as much hot water (if not MORE) as the one actually publishing the info......and even if the info IS true they are still liable for invasion of privacy and possibly intentional interferance with economic expectancy.

They DA can't use the information against Portantino if they prosecute him. The DA would have to issue a subpoena to the bank to obtain the records. The only legal exposure I see for the DA is if investigators asked one of Portantino's employees to covertly copy or steal the records from his office for use in the investigation. This would clearly be illegal.

0

Don Bauder June 17, 2010 @ 8:10 a.m.

Response to post #9: The Dale Akiki case was a disgrace, and Ed Miller's Waterloo. But when you look at all the other good things he did, you can't judge him on one mistake. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 17, 2010 @ 8:25 a.m.

Response to post #10: The first hit piece on Portantino, May 11, mentioned that documents had been turned over to the FBI and DA. The FBI did not respond to my query, but it is my understanding it passed on the investigation to the DA. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 17, 2010 @ 8:27 a.m.

Response to post #11: I would think the DA has no authority to extend some kind of protection. This is going to be a very interesting case. A number of people will be deposed. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 17, 2010 @ 8:31 a.m.

Response to post #12: The purported financial documents were from early in the year. I don't see how the DA could have asked somebody to get those documents. I can't imagine that the DA was in it then. And as you say, I don't know the DA would have the authority to have someone doing its work. As the column points out, such records cannot be subpoenaed until a case is filed. And none has been filed. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 17, 2010 @ 10:50 a.m.

I guess this case is not big enough to become a Waterloo ? Still everyone in power has someone chomping at the bit to become the successor. You just never know about absolute power and its power to corrupt absolutely.

0

sealp June 17, 2010 @ 1:26 p.m.

Not only is this article slanted and anti-gay rich with ridiculous commentary such as “a self-professed gay” and “gay war” but it’s also ludicrous. Michael Portantino defrauded his advertisers, lied about circulation numbers and had no issue with depositing the checks of those who advertised in his paper. FRAUD is still a criminal act regardless of people’s personalities and sexual orientation (which I’m still not quite clear what that slant has to do with the story you have posted and published) other than it’s a GAY publication. I’m sure Mr. Portantino is very hurried to file a lawsuit because the misappropriation of documents that confirm his illegal and criminal acts (allegedly secured illegally) really speak to his innocence. Seriously? Sounds like a seriously twisted PR piece, reminiscent of Watergate. Remember that? Impeached and in this case soon to be imprisoned. Sounds like that’s where Portantino is headed.

The weakest part of this “story” is the connection, albeit extremely loose if not even feather light, to Councilmember Carl DeMaio (the self professed GAY) and boyfriend of Jonathan Hale. Which is, in actuality, the ONLY connection he has to this fluff piece of tabloid fodder. If this is journalism and reporting at its best your paper is seriously funnier than the pullout cartoons on the wrapper of bazooka gum, which by the way, was probably created about the same time your backwards views of homosexuality are rooted. Maybe you should just write, “Faggots” because that’s what your article reads like.

0

David Dodd June 17, 2010 @ 1:53 p.m.

"Still everyone in power has someone chomping at the bit to become the successor."

It's "champing" at the bit. Sorry, pet peave. But a horse couldn't chompt at its bit if it wanted to, the bit is set behind the molars.

So far as finding anti-gay content in this story: Good luck with that angle, sealp. Gay media competes against gay media, they don't write nor publish straight stories. I read these publications. It's gay or it's ixnay. Write a story that isn't homosexually oriented and they won't publish it. Want proof? I'll provide rejection letters upon request.

0

Grasca June 17, 2010 @ 4:43 p.m.

I meant chomping as in using big incisors to take a bite out of the person in power. Literary license.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 17, 2010 @ 5:42 p.m.

I meant chomping as in using big incisors to take a bite out of the person in power. Literary license.

:)

We need to take a bite out of crime-gay crime too!

0

Psycholizard June 17, 2010 @ 6:21 p.m.

The Hale-DeMaio-Prop D connection seems most interesting. A Gay blog seems a weird place to advertise for votes on such an issue, and a domestic partner is a totally normal bagman for an extortion-bribery scheme. Smell alone proves nothing of course.

0

Don Bauder June 17, 2010 @ 9:07 p.m.

NOTE: Our satellite has been down since early this morning and I haven't been able to respond to messages, or open emails. I hope to be back up and running tomorrow (Friday). Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 18, 2010 @ 8:13 a.m.

"Alternative spellings champ at the bit [edit]Etymology Variation of champ at the bit, recasting it as chomp "to chew noisily" + bit "part of a horse's harness held in its mouth"; horses tend to chew on their bits when impatient at waiting. [edit]Verb to chomp at the bit (third-person singular simple present chomps at the bit, present participle chomping at the bit, simple past and past participle chomped at the bit) (intransitive) To show impatience or frustration when delayed. [edit]Usage notes Informal usage and technically incorrect; the more common form in formal English is champ at the bit."

0

Grasca June 18, 2010 @ 8:29 a.m.

Previous quote about "chomping and champing" from Wiktionary if anyone cares to verify for accuracy.

0

CuddleFish June 18, 2010 @ 9:27 a.m.

It's peeve, not peave.

It's chomp, not chompt.

"Gay media competes against gay media, they don't write nor publish straight stories."

"don't" and "nor," isn't that a double negative?

Of course, I'm not the English major here. I don't dare correct other's spelling or grammar, sorry.

0

CuddleFish June 18, 2010 @ 9:28 a.m.

Grasca, honey, you can chomp my bit any time!!! ;)

0

Tristan1983 June 18, 2010 @ 9:46 a.m.

Response to post #18: Clearly a Hale-Di Maio supporter if not one of them. Please "sealp". This was not anti gay, this is factual reporting. All parties concerned are self professed Gays, there is no "outing" here going on. How could this be construed as anti gay? I think this is an attempt to divert the topic so people don't look at the real issues. I think it is interesting that they are accusing someone else of "Fraudulent" behavior. I have always been taught, when you point one finger, three are pointing back at you. I hope someone is investigating the Hale-Di Maio connections and if all their business dealings and reporting are accurate. Are they showing their financial records? If Di Maio in fact advertised in Hale's publications, be it internet or print, did he pay for them? If so with what funds, his personal funds or his campaign funds? Were those expenditures reported? He is a public official, and I believe the answers are public information. I am just curious. They are calling out someone else's business practices. Sure hope theirs are above board. Me thinks not!

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 10:13 a.m.

Response to post #17: The civil suit should get to the bottom of how this happened. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:10 a.m.

Response to post #18: I do not agree with a word you say, sir, but I will fight to the death for your right....oh, you know the line. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:13 a.m.

Response to post #19: I expected to get comments saying the column was anti-gay.I got them. I also expected bitter denunciations from both sides in the dispute. I got them, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:15 a.m.

Response to posts #20 and 21: How about chumping at the bit? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:17 a.m.

Response to post #22: DeMaio could have a problem if he steered money raised from the public into his boyfriend's publication. I could not make that statement with what I was able to come up with. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:19 a.m.

Response to posts #24-27: OK, how about chimp? Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 18, 2010 @ 11:20 a.m.

I am fearful that only a chump could/would chump at the bit.

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 11:22 a.m.

Response to post #28: I looked into those angles and couldn't come up with something to go with at this time. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 18, 2010 @ 11:47 a.m.

Where are the copy editors when we need them to correct incorrect usage of the English language ? Also who does not use spell check these days ? Maybe the strange sentence construction and bad spelling is some obscure form of Middle English known to a few and used by even fewer so called writers ?

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 2 p.m.

Response to post #37: There are increasing numbers of Middle Easterners settling in San Diego. Maybe the new management shrewdly sees them as a potential market. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 18, 2010 @ 2:07 p.m.

As you probably know, I was thinking more along the lines of G. Chaucer and his Canterbury Tales. In some ways the SD Reader Blog A Sphere has characters similar to those of Chaucer and of course we are all on some journey.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 18, 2010 @ 3:02 p.m.

Also who does not use spell check these days ?

My spell check does not work outside MS Word, and my IE 7 (or is it 8?) does not have the spell check feature like Friefox does......

0

CuddleFish June 18, 2010 @ 3:48 p.m.

I have IE 7 on my laptop and there is a spellcheck on the toolbar, yours doesn't, SurfPuppy?

BTW, I forget to use it on here, Grasca! :)

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 4:44 p.m.

Response to post #39: My mother taught Chaucer. Her high school friends did, too. For years they met regularly. They called the group "Cleofans." They thought it was from a verb of the Chaucer era, meaning "stick together." Much later, a Chaucer expert told them that Cleofans meant a stick, as in the branch of a tree. But they stuck with the name Cleofans. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 4:46 p.m.

Response to post #40: I don't use spell checker. When you see a misspelling, as you certainly will, the odds are 99% it's a typo, not a misspelled word. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 4:49 p.m.

Response to post 341: You mean all along your name has been Puddlefish, not Cuddlefish? Best, Don Bauder

0

CuddleFish June 18, 2010 @ 6:04 p.m.

Ooooh, better step lightly there, Don. It was nan who picked my screenname here, and I wouldn't mess with her. ;)

0

Don Bauder June 18, 2010 @ 7:36 p.m.

Response to post #45: She's a roughneck. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 June 18, 2010 @ 8:40 p.m.

I have IE 7 on my laptop and there is a spellcheck on the toolbar, yours doesn't, SurfPuppy?

No, where at on the toolbar?

I have 1) Home 2) Feeds 3) Mail 4) Printer 5) Page 6) safety 7) Tools. 80 ? mark

0

Visduh June 18, 2010 @ 8:59 p.m.

Don, to strike a serious note in all this discursive comment, I do think that you may have revealed the beginnings of our local scandal of the decade. Anyone watching closely has known that the DA is probably the most corrupt in modern times. (But I have to second SurfPuppy's comments in Post #9 about the Akiki case. Miller's record also includes the Wade case, and his consistent failure to EVER prosecute a police shooting, of which there were many of an egregious nature. Too bad he tarnished his record of incorruptibility with those two stupid, wrongheaded prosecutions.)

I'll avoid trying to label this report of yours with a "gate" name, although one comes immediately to mind. Nothing about this has to do with the sexual preference of the participants, although you'll get plenty of claims that it is the case.

0

CuddleFish June 18, 2010 @ 9:22 p.m.

Sorry, SurfPup, I led you astray. The spellcheck is actually on my Google toolbar, above the IE toolbar.

0

PB92109 June 18, 2010 @ 10:39 p.m.

The GLT sounds like its technically insolvent given the private bank info that has been revealed. With so many writers being owed back fees and unpaid bills and overdrawn checking accounts, it sounds as if they might be thrown into bankruptcy. That is too bad because they used to provide information that was not available in some of the other alternative newsweeklies. Another "old media" publication could bite the dust. Had not heard about any of these alleged financial shenanigans, but then nothing surprises me in Scam Diego. Even a politically- motivated investigation which may collapse this apparent house of cards.

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 6:44 a.m.

Response to post #47: You will have to figure this one out yourself. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 6:48 a.m.

Response to post #48: Yes, Li Mandri, Saathoff, Madigan....the list is endless. She looks the other way when the establishment is involved. There are other examples. Agreed: Akiki was a scar on Miller's otherwise excellent record. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 6:50 a.m.

Response to post #49: That should clarify things. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 7:03 a.m.

Response to post #50: If the published bank account information is accurate -- a big "if" -- GLT has problems, but what publications (print and/or online) don't have problems? GLT has reached an agreement with the IRS and is paying off what it owes on a regular basis. SDNN is already in deep trouble. Think of the troubles it and GLN may have as the lawsuit expands. Best, Don Bauder

0

AbsolutelyPathetic June 19, 2010 @ 11:18 a.m.

Absolutely Pathetic…

“Portantino won’t comment”

Funny this whole story reeks of Portantino/GLT camp or possibly the people doing the talking for him. ie: Aguirre, Morris & Severson.

It would appear that Portantino may have a history of leaking stories to the Reader, for example the lawsuit involving Portantino and his EX a few years ago, a story appeared in the Reader trying to discredit or create issue with his EX and his employment. I am guessing that would be the motivation here too. Looks like it may have backfired!

It's my understanding the law suit filed against the former employee was done so Monday June 14th later in the day. According to Don Bauder people were covering the court house on Tuesday June 15th and obtained a copy of the suit. However also according to Bauder his story had to be completed and turned in on the Wednesday before on June 9th but could update or change the story until Monday June 14th for a Wednesday release. So how else could a Tuesday pickup of the suit have made it into the story on Monday for final editing???? Sounds fishy to me!!!

My theory is Portantino or “the people doing the talking” for him leaked it to the Reader plus may have offered suggestion of a direction the story should go to favor Portantino and call into question the ethics of our DA’s office and make it look like a political witch hunt.

Not once does the story deny that the alleged criminal activity didn’t happen but oh that’s right Portantino wont comment.

San Diego lets not forget the original light that was shed on the alleged FRAUD and not to mention the alleged mismanagement.

I commend Portantino for wanting to take care of good ole Mother dear for 25 years now but come on any good business person will tell you that you pay your staff, writers and vendors first before you take care of the owners’ needs and or family. I guess perhaps Portantino skipped ‘Good Business 101’.

I leave with one question…..If Portantino had nothing to worry about on the alleged FRAUD and possible other alleged violations why would he hire Aguirre, Morris & Severson? Aren’t they criminal defense attorneys? Hmmmmm sounds fishy to me!!!

0

nan shartel June 19, 2010 @ 11:29 a.m.

did i hear the word Puddlefish being bantied about Don Bauder????

it's that hard drinking and chasin' Don's around that causes problems on the BIG RIG

that means now we know who's to blame for that underwater OIL fiasco in the gulf that's harming my CUDDLEFISHES relatives

shape up homey!!!

signed :the roughneck...

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 2:09 p.m.

Response to post #55: The timing you describe is so far off it isn't even worth commenting upon. The story originated during a period, beginning May 28, in which I was covering all the woes of SDNN. That's when my attention was called to the two hit pieces earlier in May. I have been doing financial investigative reporting for more than 45 years. I was stunned when I saw all that purported information from the bank account of Portantino's company. I knew it couldn't have come from the bank and suspected it could not have come from a government investigator. That was confirmed, as stated in the column. Then I began making some calls and learned of all the ex-GLT employees now with GLN, GLT's competitor. I became even more suspicious when I learned the DA was involved. The column was turned in on a Wednesday; the last piece of the puzzle was Portantino's lawsuit, which came the week the column was published. The column makes no judgments on whether bank account or printing information was accurate. I have no way of knowing that. That may become clear if the DA files an action, and/or as Portantino's law firm deposes more people and possibly names more defendants. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 2:11 p.m.

Response to post #56: Ouch. Them's harsh words. Best, Don Bauder

0

AbsolutelyPathetic June 19, 2010 @ 3:56 p.m.

Response to post #57: No one is calling the amount of years you have spent reporting into question, your picture speaks for it self.

No one is calling the covering of the woes of SDNN or the time line into question.

My comment was covering both your story and the original stories that broke.

What is thought provoking is you wrote "Portantino won't comment" yet you seem to know some of the facts which are a little too close to Portantino's camp.

In your own words you commented to someone on the phone the story was going to be turned in around June 9th and could be edited up to the Monday before which would have made it June 14th, the day the suit was filed. Then you commented on the phone again, the suit documents were obtained on Tuesday June 15th, the day after according to you no more editing could be allowed. So it would appear one of three things, your time line is off, you misspoke of your company’s deadlines or old age affecting memory.

You also said in this comment that a good amount of GLT ex-employees moved over to GLN. I have never heard of a media source called GLN that's in existence in San Diego. Perhaps you mean SDGLN but memory may be an issue again. Being a “self-professed gay” as you call it.. (sounds like you have been listening to Kathy Griffin) I know about the San Diego LGBT Community and can say for sure that most of the ex-employees went to other media sources in the community but not SDGLN.

Several writers (not employees) but they contributed to GLT do write for SDGLN and my only guess would be because they could final expect a regular payment for the wonderful writing they provide the LGBT Community.

So again I stick to my original comment regarding things you have heard....they more than likely came from camp Portantino. Good Day Senior Bauder!

0

Psycholizard June 19, 2010 @ 4:47 p.m.

The Republican Party SHOULD advertise it's policy to the Gay Community, a gay blog is perfect for this, since the closeted gay tends Republican. Though no figures are possible to prove this, the contrast between Larry Craig and Barney Frank shows the wide range of political thought possible in those with roughly similar sexual practice.

My statement, that a gay blog was a strange place for Proposition D to advertise, is therefore flat wrong. Gays are Republican and Republicans are gay, on this I agree with Sealp and Pathetic.

That a blog or any publication should attack it's competition's circulation figures is not surprising.

That a DA, under personal attack from a publication, should send goons to go through files, claiming that advertisers, who have not complained, have been defrauded, shocks the conscience of any free person. Make no mistake, San Diego Gay and Lesbian Times is under attack because it is a powerful voice that some want to silence and replace, not because of weak circulation figures. If Bonnie Dumanis thought it would die soon, she wouldn't try to kill it.

I intend to overcome my squeamishness and pick up a copy.

It's not wrong for Democrats to advertise in an openly Gay publication, now is the time.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 19, 2010 @ 4:52 p.m.

So it would appear one of ..... old age affecting memory.

Them is fighting words!!!!

Perhaps you mean SDGLN but memory may be an issue again. Being a “self-professed gay” as you call it

GLN is an obvious reference to SDGLN-the question I have for you is why you would try to make such a MINOR issue out to be some sort of attack on Don's credibility.

Here is what you should do-send Don a private messege over these issues-ask him what is up-outline you issues with the timeline- he will respond.

Then I would like to see you post Don's response, because I woudl like to see who as wrong here.

0

nan shartel June 19, 2010 @ 5:17 p.m.

er...um...is someone attacking our adorable poohlover...speaking ill of him due to his wisdom speaking age or his mature fierce masculinity???

(or any other dang reason)

u dastardly dawgs!!!

tomorrow morning 6AM in the "100 Acre Woods"

Eeyore will be my second

Persian Shamshirs will be the weapon

0

SurfPuppy619 June 19, 2010 @ 5:38 p.m.

LOL@nan~!

nan...you always bring the funny........I am sure it is jsut a mix up on the time lines, no harm no foul!

BTW, I know who Eeyore is, but what are "Persian Shamshirs "

0

Grasca June 19, 2010 @ 6:13 p.m.

Mr. Bauder is a gentleman with wit and charm if his responses are any indication. I am sure that he can handle criticism but I hate to see it directed at him when there are so many more appropriate targets in the Reader community. You know - the ones who consistently violate the supposed Terms of Use. Mr. Bauder is entertaining and intelligent too. Refreshing.

0

nan shartel June 19, 2010 @ 6:16 p.m.

swords perfect for removing a foes head in ONE SWIPE puppy!!!

now u know how i got those guns

hahahahahahahahahahaha

and i wasn't serious

i hope that dang Bauder appreciate this defense of his newshound persona

0

nan shartel June 19, 2010 @ 6:19 p.m.

and yes Missy Grasca..u r a scholar and a gentlewoman

kudos and ditto

0

AbsolutelyPathetic June 19, 2010 @ 7:28 p.m.

@ all of you coming to Bauders defense. @ Nan you are funny!

Calm down people....OK OK OK I get it, maybe I was a little harsh on the old chap however if Bauder is going to write a story then write all the facts and not lean on things that may not be true just because camp Portantino says so. Don knows the questions I raised in my comments are truthful however if he will admit to it is another issue.

If anyone knows how to spin a story it's the GLT for sure.

If someone is going to reference the LGBT Community research the proper wording instead of sounding like a closeted breader (actually rumor has it that is the nick name of this paper) who runs in fear of LGBT people. We don't bite unless you ask nicely. We self-professed gays come in all sorts yes including Republicans just as I am sure all you self professed Breaders do too.

I said good day!

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 8:50 p.m.

Response to post #59: As I said, people defending Portantino wrote me emails saying I had done Portantino a disservice. You say I favored Portantino. Those are exactly the responses I expected. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 8:54 p.m.

Response to post #60: The only two prominent gay politicians mentioned in the column, Dumanis and DeMaio, are Republicans. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 8:58 p.m.

Response to post #61: I agree. The SDGLN or GLN matter is minuscule -- somebody attempting to make an issue of nothing. When I was taking notes for the column, I was typing GLN and GLT. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:01 p.m.

Response to post #62: Eeyore is one of my favorites. "Where oh where is Eeyore's tail? Can you put it in its place?" That's how one of the songs goes. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:03 p.m.

Response to post #63: Persian Shamshirs threw me, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:05 p.m.

Response to post #64: My response to many posts is "Agreed." But humility prohibits me from saying it this time. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:07 p.m.

Response to post #65: It sounds like Shamshirs resemble scimitars. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:09 p.m.

Response to posts #66 and 67: I'm starting to blush. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 19, 2010 @ 9:11 p.m.

Response to post #68: You weren't harsh. The old chap is enjoying it. Best, Don Bauder

0

SomeoneElse June 20, 2010 @ 12:25 p.m.

Response to post #59: As I said, people defending Portantino wrote me emails saying I had done Portantino a disservice. You say I favored Portantino. Those are exactly the responses I expected. Best, Don Bauder

By dbauder 8:50 p.m., Jun 19, 2010 > Report it


You know you are doing something right when both sides of an issue are upset with you.

0

nan shartel June 20, 2010 @ 3:15 p.m.

72

ah pooh lover...all and all u b a remarkably lovable human bean

u r also a well crafted prolific and subtle writer who takes a stand and doesn't vacillate when pressured and oh well u know all the other praising adjectives i might write

i'll leave off this humorous soliloquies now and look for Eeyore's tail

good Sunday on ya best Don

PS: did ya noticed i actually sound kinda smart there once

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2010 @ 7:36 p.m.

Response to post #78: Right on. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 20, 2010 @ 7:39 p.m.

Response to post #79: It was Father's Day and I had a good Sunday, getting praise from my two sons and my wife. Can't beat that. Best, Don Bauder

0

paranoidandroid June 25, 2010 @ 8:27 p.m.

Mr. Bauder, I have scanned these comments and I do not believe you have addressed your usage of the strange and offensive term "self-professed gay." This is highly insulting and below professional journalism standards. One would never see such a phrase in a respectable news publication. This information was extraneous anyway since you mention Mr. DeMaio as the boyfriend of Mr. Hale. The term "boyfriend" is not used to describe the platonic friendship between two men, so Mr. DeMaio would obviously be gay. I'm sure some would dismiss this as petty squabbling over semantics, but these nuances are important if a writer wants to avoid sounding biased. FYI, the appropriate terminology, if required, would be "openly gay." I take no issue with the rest of the article though. Thanks for reading.

0

MsGrant June 25, 2010 @ 9:45 p.m.

Your name sums it up. Who really gives a crap?? Those whose lives are devoted to taking umbrage have no life at all, really. This is of such non-issue taking as to be almost absurd. Do you really troll the blogs of publications to find things to which you take offense? This in particular was of such bottom sludge dwelling that I could not resist. Oh, again that awful talking myself out of my own argument.

0

Grasca June 25, 2010 @ 9:58 p.m.

Who does give a crap except the bottom dwellers who sift through the cat litter box and come up with their special Delphic pronouncements about correct grammar, free speech, and things of this nature. Bah humbug.

0

David Dodd June 25, 2010 @ 10:14 p.m.

"..the strange and offensive term "self-professed gay."

This one's simple. If I point out someone in an op-ed piece and casually say, for example, "Paranoidandroid, who is gay, takes issue with Bauder's article."

I'm pretty damned accusatory, aren't I? However, if I had noted your sexuality from your own reference somewhere else, in order to not appear accusatory concerning your sexuality, it would be polite of me to use "self-professed" so that the Reader wouldn't misconstrue my intentions in mentioning someone's sexuality. And the above is simply an example, I don't know your sexual orientation and it really doesn't matter.

The point, especially in an investigative piece, is to not confuse the reader with precisely what the reporter is investigating and something that is simply an important aspect of the investigatioin. In this case, the author is calling into questions motives from the publications and the characters in the piece, while noting their sexualities because the orientations are similarly aligned and the publications are rivals in that matter, but not accusatory concerning sexual orientation in general.

Hope that helps.

0

Grasca June 25, 2010 @ 10:30 p.m.

Is "self professed" the same as "out and proud ? " Again who gives a crap.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 25, 2010 @ 10:47 p.m.

FYI, the appropriate terminology, if required, would be "openly gay."

Well, I never would have known that. I assume you are in the know on this issue (and this is correct).

No harm, no foul.

BTW-what term does Mr. DeMaio use when referring to Mr. Hale???

"Hello, allow me to introduce my__, Mr. Hale"

or

"Hello, allow me to introduce Mr. Hale, my__"

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 10:54 p.m.

Response to post #82: "Openly gay" might have been better. But I can't see what's wrong with "self-professed gay." To me, it means the same. Maybe there is something I am missing. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 10:56 p.m.

Response to post #83: If "self-professed gay" is offensive, I am sorry. But I think it expresses pride in being gay -- certainly more than "openly gay" does. Best, Don Bauder

0

CuddleFish June 25, 2010 @ 10:58 p.m.

I take ParanoidAndroid's point.

For example, if I said "Carolyn Matteo, self-professed journalist," it sounds snarky. I think Don could have found another way of phrasing what he was meaning to say. Simply, "who has stated" or "who is on record" or some such wording.

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 10:59 p.m.

Response to post #84: "Sifting through cat litter" brings back memories. We had five cats, and it was my job each Sunday to dispose of the cat litter. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 11:01 p.m.

Response to post #85: I don't think those remarks make him/her a snob. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 11:05 p.m.

Response to post #86: When I wrote "self-professed gay" I gave it some thought. And, as I said before, I thought "self-professed" expressed more pride in being gay than "openly gay," which is commonly used, does. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd June 25, 2010 @ 11:06 p.m.

I have more of a problem with the polarity in the terms "gay" and "straight". It presumes that homosexuals are somehow crooked and that heterosexuals lack high-spirited merriment. Too late to change that now. I suggest that in the future we humans put a little bit more thought into what we self-profess to call ourselves.

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 11:07 p.m.

Response to posts #87 and 88: I've never heard or read "out and proud" used, but I think it is descriptive. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 25, 2010 @ 11:10 p.m.

Response to post #89: A lot of thought and reporting went into that terminology, and "boyfriend" was finally selected. I can't reveal the nature of the reportage that went into that. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 June 26, 2010 @ 12:05 a.m.

A lot of thought and reporting went into that terminology, and "boyfriend" was finally selected. I can't reveal the nature of the reportage that went into that.

I would like to get paranoidandroid's response to that though.

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 7:16 a.m.

The Copy Editor's apprentice must correct the dear Fish (post # 92) when the person in question is termed "self professed" as I believe the term was "Citizen Journalist." There is also the Part B definition of "Citizen Journalist" in the new abridged SD Reader dictionary which defines CJ as a person who "outs" anonymous bloggers by violating the Terms of Use . A Sarah Palinese/Tea Party form of reporting and self righteousness invades certain threads and reminds me of Nathaniel Hawthorne. Who can put that Scarlet Letter on anyone who disagrees ? This qualifies as improper behavior because the forum is about an exchange of ideas, or so I thought, and not about shutting people down. Some will wear the Scarlet Letter granted by CJ (Citizen Journalist not to be confused with Citizen Jerk) and continue to express their opinions. Freedom of Speech and all that jazz as Bob Fossey would say.

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 8:32 a.m.

I think # 89 response (although I am not part of the community) that an "openly/self professed" gay person might introduce their special friend as "my partner" or if they have married as "my husband" or "my wife" or maybe just by their first name ? It is so hard to be politically correct these days when insult can be added to injury at the blink of a misspoken word.

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 8:42 a.m.

Response to post #96: The term "straight" may be too close to "straitlaced." That may be where the confusion lies. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 8:44 a.m.

How does "straight arrow" fit into the equation ?

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 8:48 a.m.

Response to post #92: To call someone a "self-professed journalist" or a "purported journalist" is to belittle the individual's credentials for being in the journalism profession. I don't think that is true of "self-professed gay." You are not hinting that the person is a heterosexual in disguise. But, as I have said, I am willing to debate the point, and capitulate if I am guilty of bad usage. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 8:52 a.m.

Response to post #99: The interviews were off the record. There were some other stumbling blocks. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 8:58 a.m.

Response to post #100: I hope this forum will remain an exchange of ideas. Any Hester out there is welcome to make a post. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 9 a.m.

Can you acquire some journalistic credentials just by wishing on a star ?

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 9 a.m.

Response to point #101: "Partner" is used in some cases, yes. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 9:03 a.m.

Response to post #107: Journalistic credentials are not hard to attain. Journalistic excellence is. But here is one thing I regret to say about my profession: Mozarts don't go into journalism. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 9:09 a.m.

It turns out that Straight Arrow was a radio hero like the Green Hornet. I always thought Straight Arrow referred to someone who was honest and squeaky clean. Yes to the truth of few attaining Journalistic Excellence. Many are called but few are chosen.

0

David Dodd June 26, 2010 @ 3:19 p.m.

Re #108: "Partner" could be a reference to a business relationship, I don't think it adequately describes the relationship you intended. I think that "boyfriend" was an adequate choice, and certainly takes a high road to the possible alternative reference of "lover", which is far too personal. I'm honestly baffled by anyone who would take issue with your terms in this piece, the actual story is far more compelling.

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 3:54 p.m.

Response to post #110: Another way of saying it is, "Many try and few succeed." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 3:57 p.m.

Response to post #111: "Boyfriend" was the best we could do under the circumstances. Best, Don Bauder

0

Grasca June 26, 2010 @ 5:44 p.m.

In the presence of most gay friends the term used has been "partner" to describe their relationship. Of course, if the union has been sanctified legally, then the term becomes husband or wife. I believe that there is an expanded meaning of the word partner in these new world views. Spouse seems rather old timely to me. Really boyfriend or girlfriend conveys the sense of what is going on well enough for me unless there is a need to split hairs.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 26, 2010 @ 8:04 p.m.

I think # 89 response (although I am not part of the community) that an "openly/self professed" gay person might introduce their special friend as "my partner" or if they have married as "my husband" or "my wife

Sounds very reasonable to me. Partner is a good term if not married.

BTW- On a side note since we just mentioned gay marriage (I’m not part of the community either), the Prop 8 gay marriage case was wrapped up with final oral arguments last week in front of federal Judge Walker in San Francisco. I am fairly confident, based on the questions Judge Walker posed to the prop 8 lawyers that he will overturn Prop 8.

I am also fairly confident that the 9th will uphold Walker, and I am about 3-1 that the SCOTUS will over turn Walker and the 9th. That's how I see it playing out. Anyone else following that case and have a different take?

0

David Dodd June 26, 2010 @ 8:13 p.m.

That's if it actually gets to SCOTUS. Isn't the Constitution of California covered under the 17th Amendment? There really isn't anything for SCOTUS to overturn. You'd have to make the argument relevant to something in the Federal Constitution, and it isn't there.

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 9:12 p.m.

Response to post #14: "Live-in partners" works in some situations. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 9:14 p.m.

Response to post #15: I think that's a good bet with SCOTUS. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 26, 2010 @ 9:15 p.m.

Response to post #116: You're up, SP. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 June 27, 2010 @ 10:17 p.m.

That's if it actually gets to SCOTUS.

It is a 100% certainty this case will be heard by the SCOTUS-100%.

The SCOTUS intervened into this case (gay marriage) before it even started-blocking cameras from the court room. I have never in my life seen the SCOTUS intervene into a PENDING CASE AT THE TRIAL COURT LEVEL. Never. And the reasons given to block cameras in the court were so pretextual it was disgusting. The conservative block of the Court (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito) engaged in purely raw conservative activism-plain and simple.

Yes, they will take the case. I know they cannot wait to over turn the 9th with their activist ruling to benefit their conservative views-THEIR views, not the spirit or words of the Constitution they swore to uphold and protect.

0

SurfPuppy619 June 27, 2010 @ 10:18 p.m.

There really isn't anything for SCOTUS to overturn. You'd have to make the argument relevant to something in the Federal Constitution, and it isn't there.

Equal Protection Clause

0

David Dodd June 27, 2010 @ 11:28 p.m.

Re #120 & 121:

Again, how do they get around the 10th Amendment (my bad, sorry about the confusion)? Prior to the Civil War, SCOTUS would have loved to have had something to fall back on in order to justify the North's contentions, but since slavery wasn't a part of the Federal Constitution and the time, they couldn't affect the beginning of the Civil War. Neither is marriage a part of the Federal Constitution. The 14th Amendment is actually in favor of those who would seek to overturn prop 8, I'm at a loss as to how SCOTUS could actually use the 14th Amendment to overturn the overturn of prop 8. The only thing SCOTUS could overturn is prop 8 itself. And, I would presume that the appeals court in California would do that for them, as you predict.

0

Don Bauder June 28, 2010 @ 6:44 a.m.

Response to post #120: The current court believes in judicial activism on behalf of corporations. If you can put one moniker on this court, it's "pro-business." You can also say "pro-fraud by business." It remains to be seen whether it is anti-gay and anti-abortion. I suspect it will be. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 28, 2010 @ 6:45 a.m.

Response to post #121: Any arguments with that? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 28, 2010 @ 6:47 a.m.

Response to post #122: You're up to bat, SP. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 June 28, 2010 @ 5:39 p.m.

Again, how do they get around the 10th Amendment (my bad, sorry about the confusion)?

I think you might mean the sovereign immunity states receive under the 11th Amendment-but that only applies to lawsuits against the states.

All issues that are found in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, statutes passed by Congress or federal case law are national in scope and fall under the federal courts “case or controversy” requirements for Article III (federal court) jurisdiction.

Since the Equal Protection Clause can be applied to any law (such as prop 8) that treats people differently based on a facial application (example-blacks cannot marry whites), that would give the court jurisdiction under the Equal Protection Clause - and that is all they need.

Typically EP applies FULL protection to any law which discriminates facially based on Race, Ethnicity or Alienage - with smaller (but almost as strong) protections for gender and illegitimacy. Sexual orientation- as of yet- has not been given the strong Constitutional protections the above 5 areas have been given-but I predict the trial court and the 9th WILL give EP status to sexual orientation in this case-the Prop 8 case.

I shouldn’t say the SCOTUS will strike it down, b/c every now and then they just surprise the heck out of you with a 9-0 ruling that you never could imagine (that very rarely happens, but it does happen-and you never expect it).

0

Don Bauder June 28, 2010 @ 7:37 p.m.

Response to post #126: Now it's your turn again, Refried. Best, Don Bauder

0

Tristan1983 June 30, 2010 @ 7:08 p.m.

Hey, have you all read this?

Looks like the investigation continues ...

http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/article-7859-petition-puzzle.html#commAjax

Glad to see everyone is following up on the Di Maio Hale connection and their questionable behaviors.

Go get them Don!!!!

0

Don Bauder June 30, 2010 @ 9:57 p.m.

Response to post #128: Yes, somebody called that story to my attention and I read it. There is definitely a lot more to this gay media story. This is a hate-filled donnybrook. Best, Don Bauder

0

Tristan1983 July 1, 2010 @ 9:33 a.m.

Response to post #129: Great word "Donnybrook"!!!

That would intimate a full on battle, I think this is going to be a "one, two, three punch, you're out" kind of fight ... with little buzzards encircling De Miao & Hales heads like a cartoon knockout for villains.

I believe "We reap that which we sew". They are clearly reaping the rotten fruits of their possibly criminally punitive and civilly litigious labors.

I can only dream that the onslaught of "outing" will continue by fine reporters such as yourself. That you will expose these two for the corrupt individuals they seem to be.

0

Don Bauder July 1, 2010 @ 12:52 p.m.

Response to post #130: The district attorney's presence in the scrum complicates matters. Best, Don Bauder

0

AbsolutelyPathetic July 2, 2010 @ 10:23 p.m.

I cannot wait until everything comes to light and all is known. I will be laughing when you ALL have egg on your face.

0

Don Bauder July 3, 2010 @ 6:33 a.m.

Response to post #132: That's the risk of being a columnist or blogger: sometimes one does get egg on one's face. Best, Don Bauder

0

Twister July 12, 2010 @ 10:11 p.m.

Uh, I think this was about a news story, not about infinitely contemplating each others' navels ad nauseam. (Oh, oh, oh--for those who ferret out something to whine about in every form of expression that does not comport with their personal prejudice--NO PUN INTENDED!)

Digression is always the demagogue's weapon of choice. Responsible communication is about clarity, period. Back to the actual fact-based merits of the case, please.

Heterosexual and homosexual are both technical terms, and cast no value judgment--they are merely descriptive. "Gay" means spiritedly happy. Its use to refer to a homosexual is not uniformly accurate; therefore it can, depending upon the context, be a euphemism, i.e., unclear terminology. Anyone is free to use any term they wish, but that right stops at the tip of my nose--or more accurately, within the radius of my swing. No one has the right to threaten, obliquely or otherwise, this right. This is a well-established social more.

Eschew obfuscation. Pun intended.

And furthermore . . . one's deportment describes one's character so well that no description is needed or warranted by others. Granted, however, the immature will so indulge.

0

Don Bauder July 15, 2010 @ 12:52 p.m.

Response to post #134: Digression isn't always the demagogue's weapon of choice. Outright lying often is, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close